I think it's perfectly acceptable to point out potential pitfalls of Windows 7, as I'm sure there will be many and I by no means think Windows is perfect. But that was clearly just a nonsense article.
Especially since some of the points are flat-out hypocrisies, not just embellishments. For example, Leopard has been shown
in several studies to have many more security faults/issues then XP or Vista, it's just that it has been in the minority space so not as many hackers are exploiting them. His explanation is weak because in actuality the majority of security problems nowadays are from user-initiated problems like phishing, where the OS has nothing to do with it. Apple users tend to be more at risk for exactly what he's mentioning: they bought into the propaganda that it's "more secure then Windows" so they don't even bother protecting themselves.
The fifth point is even worse in that regard. "Windows 7 has the potential to support hardware-based DRM and could become a closed OS! That's why I prefer Mac OS, the one that implements those things already." Huh?